Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (4181)	6/2/2001 7:31:39 PM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 74559

<I never claimed that "gold underperformed by a 'hair.'" That's exactly the type of meaningless statement I would not make, I hope.> This is what I'm referring to, not gold vs stocks or whatever, although stock performance certainly has it's own statistical pitfalls: << If you compare the hourly wage of the average US worker in 1934 and now, the purchasing power of the price of gold has declined. > Just as meaningless... I would hope you wouldn't make it either buy there it is. By how much is the first thing that comes to my mind. <Physical gold isn't an investment, it's a hedge. When war or government intervention destroy the economy, you can always get someone to trade food or a boat ride out for some gold or diamonds, apparently the thinking goes. Gold is a way of making sure you survive disaster - just like some people in this country dig underground shelters and stockpile guns and food and water and medical supplies. I doubt very seriously that it's going to come to that in this country under any foreseeable scenario, but I am aware that there are those who do. Frankly, I think the guys with the guns would just shoot you and take the gold away from you, so you're better off staying close to civilization.> I disagree with the whole premise... gold has always been held as currency or value store, invested in, or whatever you want to call it... it has been used as currencies, in currencies and backed currencies etc etc forever. IMO it IS basically a currency, and is a great place to hold wealth if one is worried about the trustworthiness of ones central banker/ government's money printing policy. <Heinz isn't predicting some sort of global catastrophe - he's predicting that the price of gold will appreciate due to short squeezing - too much of it leased. That ought to tell you something about how badly it sucks as an investment. It costs so much to store it that the people who are holding it are leasing it just to recoup their overhead.> LOL, I didn't say global catastrophe... I said financial, and yes he is if you call 700 on S&P such... or $800 OZ gold, or whatever... short squeeze is a side show. As for gold leasing, apparently you aren't well versed in the securities markets... the value of shares on borrow dwarfs that of all commodities combined...let along the govy bond sector... the notional value of fixed income and equity derivates outstanding makes gold not worth mentioning. Based on your line of reasoning gold is indeed a fine investment. <So far, and it's been decades, I've done better off with my investments. Gold will have to do very well indeed to make up for how badly it's sucked for the past few decades. It may in fact do very well in the future.> Yes, different asset classes can over and under perform for decades... perhaps longer, who knows. As any portfolio manager will tell you "past performance is no guarantee of future returns"... the 20 year gold bear doesn't make me bearish... besides, it's been a fine year for goldSHARES: siliconinvestor.com After the nasty correction we've had, I'd say things are looking up. DAK